Ps3 possibly too weak to run Skyrim DLC

The reason why Bethesda is having a hard time with PS3 is because they are lazy devs and don't know how to do ports right.ShadowMoses900

ps3 only does cutscene heavy games and super linear set piece games well, so sorry for those of you that have to buy awesome games like skyrim and rdr on it :-(

The PS3 is not too weak, Bethesda is just too lazy, I really wish Skyrim was a 360 exclusive, I would rather no game than one that doesn't work.

The PS3 is not too weak, Bethesda is just too lazy, I really wish Skyrim was a 360 exclusive, I would rather no game than one that doesn't work.

RageQuitter69

Yeah, I'm sure that's it. I'm sure Bethesda is just lying to us about working diligently to get the content available on the PS3 and being held back by technical limitations when in reality, they're just too lazy.

That must be it. There couldn't possibly be a better, less BS explanation. :roll:

[QUOTE="RageQuitter69"]

The PS3 is not too weak, Bethesda is just too lazy, I really wish Skyrim was a 360 exclusive, I would rather no game than one that doesn't work.

The_Game21x

Yeah, I'm sure that's it. I'm sure Bethesda is just lying to us about working diligently to get the content available on the PS3 and being held back by technical limitations when in reality, they're just too lazy.

That must be it. There couldn't possibly be a better, less BS explanation. :roll:

More likely that their engine is a piece of crap and is really built for the PC first and then ported to the consoles.

All of the games using that engine, with the exception of Oblivion, (Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skryim) have been crap on the PS3. It's pretty obvious the thing is built first for the PC, then for the 360, and then they hack it to work on the PS3.

The Skyrim Engine is a desendent of the engine they used for Morrowind, which was originally built for the PC. Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skryim all use the same engine (even if upgraded in certain areas) and all suffer from the same issues. The PS3 verison of all of these games has been nothing but a rough hack job as seriously optimizing the engine for the PS3 would require an extensive re-write, something that they don't have time for.

we know the ps3 isn't as easy to program for. i don't think it's a "power" problem.

CaseyWegner

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="RageQuitter69"]

The PS3 is not too weak, Bethesda is just too lazy, I really wish Skyrim was a 360 exclusive, I would rather no game than one that doesn't work.

Wasdie

Yeah, I'm sure that's it. I'm sure Bethesda is just lying to us about working diligently to get the content available on the PS3 and being held back by technical limitations when in reality, they're just too lazy.

That must be it. There couldn't possibly be a better, less BS explanation. :roll:

More likely that their engine is a piece of crap and is really built for the PC first and then ported to the consoles.

All of the games using that engine, with the exception of Oblivion, (Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skryim) have been crap on the PS3. It's pretty obvious the thing is built first for the PC, then for the 360, and then they hack it to work on the PS3.

The Skyrim Engine is a desendent of the engine they used for Morrowind, which was originally built for the PC. Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skryim all use the same engine (even if upgraded in certain areas) and all suffer from the same issues. The PS3 verison of all of these games has been nothing but a rough hack job as seriously optimizing the engine for the PS3 would require an extensive re-write, something that they don't have time for.

A lot of what you said was redundant but I get what you're saying. :P

I'm well aware that the engine's underpinings are ancient and that's what led to the performance issues on the PS3 but my argument is simply that saying Bethesda is merely "lazy" for the performance issues on the PS3 is foolish when there are so many other factors at work here, including the differences in the PS3's architecture from the PC and 360.

If you ask me, the game shouldn't have been released on the PS3 at all if Bethesda couldn't get it running up to code with the 360 version but there's nothing that can be done about that now. Besides, I'm sure higher ups at both Sony and Bethesda were pretty adamant about getting it released on the PS3 no matter the difficulty.

It's most likely a RAM issue since the PS3 not only has less RAM to work with than the 360 (since its OS takes up more space) but its RAM is segregated into different channels rather than being unified like the 360's.

The_Game21x

Also, Xbox 360 includes hardware 3DC (4:1, normal maps) and 3DC+(2:1, light maps, shadow maps, HDR textures, material properties) texture compression format support.

3DC/3DC+ was included in DX10 standard. PC's DX9 standard doesn't support 3DC/3DC+ and may use the brute force approach.

No. The PS3 is actually the most powerful console on the market (which is why the 360 can't compete with it in graphics or tech). The reason why Bethesda is having a hard time with PS3 is because they are lazy devs and don't know how to do ports right.

This happens very rarely on PS3, there is only a small handful of bad ports, the rest all look and play the same as the 360 versions. PS3 is not the only system to suffer bad ports unfortunately, PC has gottent them to and I think even 360 has had a couple as well.

In the end it comes down to the devs, some are lazy, some are not. But I think Bethesda has learned their lesson with Skyrim (which looks and plays just like the 360 version after the update).

Also there is more to your link then you showed. It said they are optimizing it for PS3, not that it's not coming or it's too weak. Kinda funnny how you left that out.

You mean the devs were to stupid to get it work with the PS3? Anything the 360 can do the PS3 can do better " bu bu PS3 cant do open world games" then why do AC:REV and LA Noir both look better on the PS3 over the 360?

At least the PS3 is good at running Blu-ray movies!

But teh cell!!

TopTierHustler

to be brutally honest Bethesda need to actually find someone thats capable of porting games to PS3 and hire them to do their ports.Oblivion on PS3 worked brilliant and was done by 4J studios, they also done the minecraft port for 360 aswell.

Why are Bethesda doing this internally when they seem incapable, a lot of other open world games have little to no issue dont see why bethesda cant either.

At least the PS3 is good at running Blu-ray movies!

rrjim1

With external laptop blu-ray drive, my tablet can run blu-ray movies @1080p via HDMI. Intel Atom with PowerVR SGX 54x IGP can also do it.

I think Beethesda shouldn't release their games anymore on the PS3 because of the difficulty that system represents. A poor game will just not be received well for the owners of that system.

I think Beethesda shouldn't release their games anymore on the PS3 because of the difficulty that system represents. A poor game will just not be received well for the owners of that system.

crusadernm

if it was soo difficult why arent other dev's having the same issues as Bethesda.It honestly seems like incompetence in engine design.

[QUOTE="crusadernm"]

I think Beethesda shouldn't release their games anymore on the PS3 because of the difficulty that system represents. A poor game will just not be received well for the owners of that system.

razgriz_101

if it was soo difficult why arent other dev's having the same issues as Bethesda.It honestly seems like incompetence in engine design.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="RageQuitter69"]

The PS3 is not too weak, Bethesda is just too lazy, I really wish Skyrim was a 360 exclusive, I would rather no game than one that doesn't work.

Wasdie

Yeah, I'm sure that's it. I'm sure Bethesda is just lying to us about working diligently to get the content available on the PS3 and being held back by technical limitations when in reality, they're just too lazy.

That must be it. There couldn't possibly be a better, less BS explanation. :roll:

More likely that their engine is a piece of crap and is really built for the PC first and then ported to the consoles.

All of the games using that engine, with the exception of Oblivion, (Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skryim) have been crap on the PS3. It's pretty obvious the thing is built first for the PC, then for the 360, and then they hack it to work on the PS3.

The Skyrim Engine is a desendent of the engine they used for Morrowind, which was originally built for the PC. Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skryim all use the same engine (even if upgraded in certain areas) and all suffer from the same issues. The PS3 verison of all of these games has been nothing but a rough hack job as seriously optimizing the engine for the PS3 would require an extensive re-write, something that they don't have time for.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

Yeah, I'm sure that's it. I'm sure Bethesda is just lying to us about working diligently to get the content available on the PS3 and being held back by technical limitations when in reality, they're just too lazy.

That must be it. There couldn't possibly be a better, less BS explanation. :roll:

PAL360

More likely that their engine is a piece of crap and is really built for the PC first and then ported to the consoles.

All of the games using that engine, with the exception of Oblivion, (Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skryim) have been crap on the PS3. It's pretty obvious the thing is built first for the PC, then for the 360, and then they hack it to work on the PS3.

The Skyrim Engine is a desendent of the engine they used for Morrowind, which was originally built for the PC. Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skryim all use the same engine (even if upgraded in certain areas) and all suffer from the same issues. The PS3 verison of all of these games has been nothing but a rough hack job as seriously optimizing the engine for the PS3 would require an extensive re-write, something that they don't have time for.

or bethesda could drop their horrenndous middleware setup and go for a far more reliable setup like say UE3.Gamebryo is just terrible on PS3 and probably costing them as much but not delivering the same amounts of consumer satisfaction.

They should either get the game working and not half ass their ports and make themselves look stupid or switch to a better middleware much better suited for multiplatform developement.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

More likely that their engine is a piece of crap and is really built for the PC first and then ported to the consoles.

All of the games using that engine, with the exception of Oblivion, (Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skryim) have been crap on the PS3. It's pretty obvious the thing is built first for the PC, then for the 360, and then they hack it to work on the PS3.

The Skyrim Engine is a desendent of the engine they used for Morrowind, which was originally built for the PC. Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skryim all use the same engine (even if upgraded in certain areas) and all suffer from the same issues. The PS3 verison of all of these games has been nothing but a rough hack job as seriously optimizing the engine for the PS3 would require an extensive re-write, something that they don't have time for.

razgriz_101

or bethesda could drop their horrenndous middleware setup and go for a far more reliable setup like say UE3.Gamebryo is just terrible on PS3 and probably costing them as much but not delivering the same amounts of consumer satisfaction.

They should either get the game working and not half ass their ports and make themselves look stupid or switch to a better middleware much better suited for multiplatform developement.

Considering PS3 architecture and design, i dont think Bethesda could have done any better. Anyway, Skyrim on PS3 has a 9.1 user score. Im sure its not that bad!

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="PAL360"] So, Bethesda should create a new engine especially for PS3 and delay the game 5 more years, because Sony decided their console would be a pain in the *** for devs to develop for. Sounds fair.

PAL360

or bethesda could drop their horrenndous middleware setup and go for a far more reliable setup like say UE3.Gamebryo is just terrible on PS3 and probably costing them as much but not delivering the same amounts of consumer satisfaction.

They should either get the game working and not half ass their ports and make themselves look stupid or switch to a better middleware much better suited for multiplatform developement.

Considering PS3 architecture and design, i dont think Bethesda could have done any better. Anyway, Skyrim on PS3 has a 9.1 user score. Im sure its not that bad!

people keep givin bethesda a get out of jail free card.

Bayonetta didnt get one, neither did Valve and both developers ended up embracing the PS3 after their mistakes and made some top quality game.

Its horrendous theres a few big major boo-boo's engine wise, not to mention gamebryo and PS3 never worked ever FO3 and NV were terrible ports but as its bethesda they got a free pass which is shocking.

People go ohh but its the PS3 architecture, but if that were such a problem why do other developers seem to do fine and have nary a complaint, this is just a sheer case of bethesda being incompetant (inb4 b-b-b-but skyrim keeps track of all the stuff in the world you do know that can be done on a world cell by cell basis from a loading perspective reducing memory cost).

Its a simple case of Bethesda's middleware just generally being a pile of suck.Pretty sure it only recognised 2GB of RAM at launch aswell showing how backward it actualyl is especialyl in this day and age consiidering the mammoth amounts of RAM some PC's have now.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

or bethesda could drop their horrenndous middleware setup and go for a far more reliable setup like say UE3.Gamebryo is just terrible on PS3 and probably costing them as much but not delivering the same amounts of consumer satisfaction.

They should either get the game working and not half ass their ports and make themselves look stupid or switch to a better middleware much better suited for multiplatform developement.

razgriz_101

Considering PS3 architecture and design, i dont think Bethesda could have done any better. Anyway, Skyrim on PS3 has a 9.1 user score. Im sure its not that bad!

people keep givin bethesda a get out of jail free card.

Bayonetta didnt get one, neither did Valve and both developers ended up embracing the PS3 after their mistakes and made some top quality game.

Its horrendous theres a few big major boo-boo's engine wise, not to mention gamebryo and PS3 never worked ever FO3 and NV were terrible ports but as its bethesda they got a free pass which is shocking.

People go ohh but its the PS3 architecture, but if that were such a problem why do other developers seem to do fine and have nary a complaint, this is just a sheer case of bethesda being incompetant (inb4 b-b-b-but skyrim keeps track of all the stuff in the world you do know that can be done on a world cell by cell basis from a loading perspective reducing memory cost).

Its a simple case of Bethesda's middleware just generally being a pile of suck.Pretty sure it only recognised 2GB of RAM at launch aswell showing how backward it actualyl is especialyl in this day and age consiidering the mammoth amounts of RAM some PC's have now.

i personally believe it's down to the Fact the Ps3 has less useable memeory due to having aHigher OS footprint and lack of 10Mb of Edram, the 360 has an OS footprint of 32 MB which gives it 480Mb of useable memory, The ps3 has an OS footprint of 50Mb 'Joystiq reports that Sony has quietly updated the PS3 over the last few months to unlock extra RAM for developers. The latest firmware update reportedly adds an extra 70MB of RAM for the developers to use. The extra RAM comes as a result of reducing the footprint of the PS3 OS from 120MB to 50MB.' Which gives the 360 an Extra 18 MB of memory to load things into, also, the Ps3's split memory archtecture doesn't help, for example lets just say that skyrim uses 450mb to run the game, with the 360 that leaves 450-32=30Mb to load a save file into, on the Ps3 you have 450-50=12Mb to load a save file into but because you have split memory on the Ps3 that only leaves 6Mb in either the V-ram or Main ram pool to load the savegame into, thats why Memory leak is a problem with the Ps3 if the save files get too big on skyrim plus the Ps3 doesn't have the benefit of a 10Mb Edram framebuffer, Factor in the Fact that more DLC probably means a bigger savegame and you can see where bethesda might be having a problem with dawnguard, i find it strange that after 2010 SONY made no further effort to lower the OS footprint on the PS3, would have saved them a lot of Headaches, Don't get me wrong i know that hardware-wise the Ps3 is marginally more powerful than the Xbox 360 but the 360 has more efficient software and another advantage which is directX, Open GL is just as good but not really supported as much by games developers.this has nothing to do woth the Ps3 having weak hardware it has more to do with the way it's set up and the software it uses.

delta3074

PS3's uses LibGCM and PSGL, which is based on NVIDIA CG and OpenGL ES.

For general case. "Ps3 is marginally more powerful than the Xbox 360" claim would be false i.e. prove it without subjective art work influences.

LibGCM doesn't overcome the known Geforce 7 design issues. LibGCM is close-to-metal type software for NVIDIA RSX and PC NVIDIA driver writers would be familiar with its operation.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

More likely that their engine is a piece of crap and is really built for the PC first and then ported to the consoles.

All of the games using that engine, with the exception of Oblivion, (Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skryim) have been crap on the PS3. It's pretty obvious the thing is built first for the PC, then for the 360, and then they hack it to work on the PS3.

The Skyrim Engine is a desendent of the engine they used for Morrowind, which was originally built for the PC. Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, and Skryim all use the same engine (even if upgraded in certain areas) and all suffer from the same issues. The PS3 verison of all of these games has been nothing but a rough hack job as seriously optimizing the engine for the PS3 would require an extensive re-write, something that they don't have time for.

razgriz_101

or bethesda could drop their horrenndous middleware setup and go for a far more reliable setup like say UE3.Gamebryo is just terrible on PS3 and probably costing them as much but not delivering the same amounts of consumer satisfaction.

They should either get the game working and not half ass their ports and make themselves look stupid or switch to a better middleware much better suited for multiplatform developement.

Name one UE3 based console game with the same scale as Skyrim. PC UE3 based MMOs not included.

Most good graphics UE3 based games are near rail shooters e.g. Epic's Bulletstorm (aka Gears of War 3 without a license).

Mass Effect 3(UE3) action RPG doesn't have the same scale as Skyrim.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="PAL360"] So, Bethesda should create a new engine especially for PS3 and delay the game 5 more years, because Sony decided their console would be a pain in the *** for devs to develop for. Sounds fair.

ronvalencia

or bethesda could drop their horrenndous middleware setup and go for a far more reliable setup like say UE3.Gamebryo is just terrible on PS3 and probably costing them as much but not delivering the same amounts of consumer satisfaction.

They should either get the game working and not half ass their ports and make themselves look stupid or switch to a better middleware much better suited for multiplatform developement.

Name one UE3 based console game with the same scale as Skyrim. PC UE3 based MMOs not included.

Most good graphics UE3 based games are near rail shooters e.g. Epic's Bulletstorm (aka Gears of War 3 without a license).

Mass Effect 3(UE3) action RPG doesn't have the same scale as Skyrim.

The only alternative engine i could see plausible for a game like Skyrim, would be Rage engine (GTA4 and RDR), from Rockstar. But PS3 is not very good at handling it aswell.

I dont see the problem anyway. Skyrim looks beautiful the way it is, even on consoles.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

or bethesda could drop their horrenndous middleware setup and go for a far more reliable setup like say UE3.Gamebryo is just terrible on PS3 and probably costing them as much but not delivering the same amounts of consumer satisfaction.

They should either get the game working and not half ass their ports and make themselves look stupid or switch to a better middleware much better suited for multiplatform developement.

PAL360

Name one UE3 based console game with the same scale as Skyrim. PC UE3 based MMOs not included.

Most good graphics UE3 based games are near rail shooters e.g. Epic's Bulletstorm (aka Gears of War 3 without a license).

Mass Effect 3(UE3) action RPG doesn't have the same scale as Skyrim.

The only alternative engine i could see plausible for a game like Skyrim, would be Rage engine (GTA4 and RDR), from Rockstar. But PS3 is not very good at handling it aswell.

I dont see the problem anyway. Skyrim looks beautiful the way it is, even on consoles.

ID tech considering they own ID now.

But at rons point its a poweful engine and we've seen it put to work on games, it could easily adapt.

Bull$hit.ShadowsDemon

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]Bull$hit.derptholomew

what if said person does not own a 360.

Still this is a classic case of incompetence.Least Konami bucked up bout Silent hill, Bethesda should really do the same in my book.

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]Bull$hit.derptholomew

[QUOTE="derptholomew"][QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]Bull$hit.ShadowsDemon

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="derptholomew"] shoulda got the 360 version, there where warnings before it was released that the ps3 version wouldnt be up to snuffderptholomew

the 360 may not suit his tastes ever think bout that?

oh wait its system wars nobody ever uses any of their brain in here now since the TOU chanes.

I don't get how is that a problem for bethesda, it's not like my game was running decently to begin with.

why can't they let the people that ported oblivion do skyrim? so this doesn't happen again...

.EzcapeTheFate

You mean the PS3 has RAM issues? No way!

This has been known since its specs were first announced.

No. The PS3 is actually the most powerful console on the market (which is why the 360 can't compete with it in graphics or tech). The reason why Bethesda is having a hard time with PS3 is because they are lazy devs and don't know how to do ports right.

This happens very rarely on PS3, there is only a small handful of bad ports, the rest all look and play the same as the 360 versions. PS3 is not the only system to suffer bad ports unfortunately, PC has gottent them to and I think even 360 has had a couple as well.

In the end it comes down to the devs, some are lazy, some are not. But I think Bethesda has learned their lesson with Skyrim (which looks and plays just like the 360 version after the update).

Also there is more to your link then you showed. It said they are optimizing it for PS3, not that it's not coming or it's too weak. Kinda funnny how you left that out.